The Two Pillars of Freemasonry Stone and Sand Philippe Langlet · English translation English machine-translation draft of Philippe Langlet’s doctoral thesis, University of Limoges, 2008. All 258 source pages are covered, including notes, bibliography, appendices and errata. The base translation was produced locally with Argos Translate (French-English model 1.9) and has received several rounds of targeted bilingual editorial correction. It has not undergone a complete scholarly, sentence-by-sentence human translation review. Source-page labels and all page references refer to the original French PDF. Paragraphs continuing across a page break may be completed under their starting page. Existing English quotations are retained where recognized. Published bibliographic titles remain in their original language for reliable identification, including historical spellings such as Rit. The explanations of the bibliography’s coding system are translated. Proper names and source abbreviations are retained. Abbreviated table codes are kept where their expansion is uncertain. Errata retain the French forms being corrected, with the explanatory wording in English. Original illustrations are reproduced as source material; the diagram in Appendix I has an English label key. Editorial terminology reference: Wikipedia, Vocabulaire de la franc-maçonnerie (consulted 30 September 2026). Usage varies with rite, country and Masonic body. This reference was added for the translation; it is not part of the author’s bibliography. The source’s term Traditioners is rendered as Traditionalists. Dates marked as uncertain in the source remain uncertain. Read the terminology reference. S o u r c e p a g e 1 University of Limoges Doctoral School of Humanities and Social Sciences No. 375 Faculty of Arts and Humanities Department of Language Sciences Centre for Semiotic Research (CeReS) The Two Pillars of Freemasonry Stone and Sand Thesis submitted for the degree of Doctor of Letters presented and defended by Philippe Langlet under the supervision of Professors Jacques Fontanille and Isabelle Klock-Fontanille Examining committee: Jacques Fontanille, University of Limoges, Institut universitaire de France Isabelle Klock-Fontanille, University of Limoges, Catholic Institute of Paris Pierre-Yves Beaurepaire, University of Nice Sophia-Antipolis, Institut universitaire de France, thesis reviewer Jean-Pierre Lassalle, University of Toulouse II-Le Mirail, thesis reviewer Jean-Pierre Levet, University of Limoges Jérôme Rousse-Lacordaire, Catholic Institute of Paris S o u r c e p a g e 2 This source page contains no substantive text. S o u r c e p a g e 3 Contents Introduction ... 7 1. The Masonic ritual, object of study? ... 9 1.1 First approaches ... 9 1.2 Definitions ... 10 1.2.1 The "Ritual" ... 10 1.2.2 The "Rite" ... 11 1.2.3 Form, support, contents ... 12 1.3 Is "Ritual" a literary genre? ... 15 1.3.1 Can we define a kind of ritual? ... 18 1.4 Various approaches to ritual ... 20 1.5 Ritual and rite ... 23 1.5.1 Sequencing aspect of the rite ... 26 1.5.2 Symbolic aspect ... 29 1.6 Some rite approaches ... 30 1.7 Rite, stereotyping and archaic ... 31 1.8 Rite and language ... 35 1.9 Lexicon and Masonic Rite ... 36 1.9.1 The theory of origins ... 38 1.9.2 Declinations of the theory and mental framework ... 42 1.9.3 Some justifications for "transition" ... 44 1.9.4 Middle Ages, Legend and Masonry ... 45 1.9.5 The vulgate and the authors ... 47 1.9.6 Effects of "transition" ... 52 1.9.7 Construction of a History ... 55 1.10 Elements of the Masonic Rite ... 57 1.10.1 Some typologies ... 57 1.10.2 Principles of Taxonomy ... 60 1.10.3 The first circle, the surrounding space ... 62 1.10.4 The second circle, the personal space ... 71 1.10.5 The third circle, the intimate space ... 73 1.10.5.1 Attitudes and postures ... 74 1.10.5.2 The movements ... 75 1.10.5.3 The gestures ... 76 1.10.5.4 The words ... 77 1.10.5.5 The sounds ... 79 1.10.6 The centre of the Rite ... 79 1.11 The characters of the Rite ... 80 2. The corpus... 85 2.1 Rites and Masonic Obediences ... 85 2.1.1 The question of the original Rite ... 87 2.1.2 Sampling ... 88 2.2 Temporal and spatial boundaries ... 88 2.2.1 Time limits ... 88 2.2.2 Space limits ... 89 2.3 Antients and Moderns ... 90 2.3.1 First Grand Lodge ... 91 2.3.2 Grand Lodge in York ... 91 2.3.3 Grand Lodge of Antients ... 92 2.3.4 Traditionalists ... 92 2.3.5 The United Grand Lodge of England ... 93 2.3.6 In France ... 93 S o u r c e p a g e 4 2.4 Contemporary rituals ... 94 2.4.1 French Rituals ... 94 2.4.1.1 Scottish Rituals ... 94 2.4.1.2 French Rituals ... 95 2.4.1.3 Scottish Rituals Rectified ... 96 2.4.1.4 Other rituals ... 96 2.4.2 Anglophone rituals ... 97 2.4.2.1 England ... 97 2.4.2.2 Ireland ... 99 2.4.2.3 Scotland ... 99 2.4.2.4 The United States ... 100 2.4.2.5 Other countries ... 101 2.5 Ancient rituals ... 102 2.5.1 "Modern" Rite rituals ... 102 2.5.1.1 The eighteenth century ... 102 2.5.1.2 The 19th century ... 105 2.5.1.3 The twentieth century ... 106 2.5.2 Rituals of the “Ancient Scottish” Rite ... 107 2.5.2.1 The 18th century ... 107 2.5.2.2 The 19th century ... 108 2.5.2.3 The twentieth century ... 108 2.5.3 Other Scottish rituals ... 108 2.6 Other documents used ... 109 3. Key Questions of the Research ... 113 3.1 Preamble ... 113 3.2 Position of academics ... 114 3.2.1 Researcher or Seeker? ... 116 3.2.2 How Should “Authentic” Research Be Defined? ... 120 3.2.3 Delimitation of our research ... 121 3.3 The Initiation Ceremony ... 122 3.3.1 The ceremony and its structures ... 124 3.3.2 The oath ... 128 3.3.3 A dividing line ... 128 3.4 The legend of Hiram ... 130 3.4.1 The discovery of new tools ... 130 3.4.2 The Structures of the Legend ... 131 3.4.3 The double system ... 132 3.4.4 Christian Sources ... 135 3.4.5 Radical revisions ... 137 3.4.6 The contribution of Vladimir Propp ... 139 3.5 Text sources and the question of translation ... 141 3.5.1 The "library" and translation errors ... 145 3.5.2 Masonic-English jargon ... 146 3.5.3 Losses of Meaning ... 149 3.5.4 An Accurate Interpretation, as Far as Possible ... 150 3.5.5 How to translate "perfect" ... 154 3.6 Liberal Arts ... 155 3.6.1 Approximation and uncertainty ... 155 3.6.2 Vitruvius and liberal arts ... 157 3.6.3 Martianus Capella and liberal arts ... 159 3.6.4 Place of rhetoric ... 163 3.6.5 An Example of a Figure of Speech ... 166 3.6.6 An Example of a Figure in Gesture ... 168 3.6.7 Invention and memory ... 169 3.6.8 Memory and places ... 171 3.6.9 Exercise ... 176 3.6.10 Lineaments of the method ... 179 3.6.11 The Degree Tracing Board, a Speaking Image ... 181 3.6.11.1 Images and words ... 183 S o u r c e p a g e 5 3.6.11.2 Representation and thought ... 184 Conclusions ... 186 Bibliography ... 196 1. Freemasonry... 196 2. Language sciences ... 203 3. Anthropology, ethnology, ritual... 208 4. History... 211 5. Other ... 212 6. Rituals... 214 Annexes ... 218 Annex I ... 221 Annex II ... 223 Annex III ... 227 Annex IV ... 237 Annex V ... 247 Annex VI ... 249 S o u r c e p a g e 6 Acknowledgements I wish to thank my thesis supervisors, Jacques Fontanille and Isabelle Klock-Fontanille, for their patience and advice, but above all for their friendly support, which encouraged me to resume and complete this work. I thank the friends who share my research interests and who, over many long months, have had to endure my requests for proofreading and corrections. Finally, I thank the various heads of institutions who enabled me to resume and continue my studies, as well as the staff of the University Library of Limoges for their helpfulness. Dedication I particularly wish to dedicate this work to the memory of my friend and brother Jean Villegoureix: for the sincerity of his presence and the constancy of his friendship; for his unwavering encouragement and enriching discussions; and for sharing his extraordinary learning in so many fields throughout nearly thirty-five years of a shared quest. The great teacher he was wished to be an instituteur: someone who establishes another person in knowledge. May he receive my deepest thanks. I also dedicate it to my parents, whom I undoubtedly saddened by refusing to follow in their footsteps as secular schoolteachers, but who left me free to make my own choices. S o u r c e p a g e 7 Introduction In the 1960s, the intellectual climate encouraged the assertion that we were living through a period of accelerating knowledge. This was not untrue. The complexity of reality seemed to demand a long and sustained effort if one was not to succumb to discouragement. Everything seemed possible for science. It delved into matter in order to understand it at the deepest level. Everything became more complicated for the very discipline that was supposed to make it simpler. It surfed triumphantly on the foam of ancient societies. François Le Lionnais, an Oulipian by vocation, wrote about ‘False Sciences: Diseases of Our Civilization’ (1954), and Maurice Colignon had published a work opposing ‘the false prophets and sects of today’ (1953). Academics saw rites as nothing more than prelogical forms of behaviour opposed to the development of human reason. The distance between religion and science increased as light—the Enlightenment?—triumphed over the magical and religious superstitions of the past. Literary studies sought, through mathematical formulations, recognition from those who dominated intellectual debate: everything dressed itself in scientific garb. Yet scientific and technological ‘liberation’ seemed dangerous to some, who warned that we would soon ‘die with our mouths hanging open’—the title of a journal of apocalyptic early environmentalists. The inevitable death of rites and their logical disappearance continued to be proclaimed, but human beings felt themselves ‘slipping away’ from themselves. Studies of rites nevertheless continued: the rest of the world did not follow the dominant French intellectuals. Yet this kind of text—ritual texts—was examined only by specialists whose academically recognized designation as anthropologists or ethnologists authorized them to investigate subjects marked by archaism and primitiveness. Historians, working on the past, were granted a pardon. Forty years ago, slogans blossomed in Paris: ‘It is forbidden to forbid’, ‘Life is elsewhere’, ‘Run, comrade, the old world is behind you’, and ‘Beneath the paving stones, the beach’. The last of these prompted a flood of commentary, mostly political. A simple desire for freedom—or liberation!—or a happy conjunction at a particular moment in history: students in revolt tore up the paving stones of Paris as they fought the intolerable dictates of an excessively rigid society. Tearing them up revealed the bedding beneath them: the sand on which they rested. S o u r c e p a g e 8 Whether the first hypothesis is correct or another explanation applies, the phrase describes, in a concise and felicitous way—perhaps unintentionally, which makes it all the more memorable—a strong opposition between culture and nature. Culture is symbolized by the ‘paving stone’, a manufactured object of the civilized world, a dressed stone intended to give a thoroughfare firm and lasting stability. Sand, in its innocent simplicity, symbolizes a nature imagined as pristine, yet concealed beneath the oppressive weight of stone. Destroying the cultural veneer was supposed to recover the natural world. Everything became possible! The answer is doubtless just as naive: the sand was beneath the paving stones only because it too had been extracted from a quarry and placed there by the will of human builders. Yet this opposition is not false; it remains at work everywhere. The world offered for reflection to those born into it exists only because they cast upon it a gaze that sorts the objects they examine into the ‘natural’ and the ‘cultural’. But this sorting gaze is taught by the very society they sometimes reject. Human beings sort, classify, distinguish, discriminate and isolate parts of the continuum presented to them in order to understand it. They seek to ‘find their bearings’. The metaphor of two levels, or multiple levels,[1] naturally applies to texts: surface meaning and deeper significance, the apparent level and the concealed reality. A rite is quite comparable to a text: its visible level of performance is accompanied by a reality that reveals itself only gradually. Our work concerns the texts used in a particular ritual practice, Freemasonry. Our cultural education led us to regard the Masonic phenomenon, beyond its practice, as a cultural phenomenon that should also be studied as a researcher. The human sciences and comparison with other religious or initiatory practices are indispensable. At the same time, we had to seek out the original ritual texts, often rendered incomprehensible by poor translations, in order to understand their precise significance. These are the broad lines that have guided our work. Our commentary may at times appear ironic on particular points, or concerning certain forms of human behaviour in relation to rituals. For us, this slightly displaced perspective is an approach with fundamental heuristic value: this smiling ‘step to one side’ prevents us from taking at face value the unshakeable seriousness of ritual practitioners, or indeed the texts as they first appear to us. [1] Lubac, 1964. S o u r c e p a g e 9 1. The Masonic ritual, object of study? 1.1 First approaches The subject of the various studies that we conduct for forty years in a diffuse manner, and more than twenty years in a diligent manner, is the Masonic Rite. We have only been able to do so through a series of texts which retain the form and, hopefully, the content. We will call these texts a general term, ritual. Apart from the part of this presentation where we briefly mention other forms of ritual, "rites" will most often refer to the Masonic form, the Masonic ritual, and will then not be further specified, except to add qualifiers relating to the different types encountered. The first questions we will ask, before entering into other considerations, will be: how to define ritual? and can it be a subject of study? They arise "of course", because our approach remains based on an approach defining first the terms of his study before any description of the objects by composing the corpus. It goes without saying that we will not approach ritual as an anthropologist, ethnologist, or historian, although the contributions of these disciplines are extremely fruitful for us. We will not attempt to do so, because we have not been trained in their methods, even if we occasionally cite them. We approach ritual as curious observers, starting from a ritual more familiar to us than the others: Masonic ritual; as curious observers, but also as lovers of texts; and out of curiosity about the way those texts organize their content. For our purposes, ritual will be treated as a text, defining “text” as a form of written or oral discourse[2]. Our first encounter with it was in the form of a printed booklet containing instructions for a Masonic ceremony. We will first attempt to define the notion of ritual. We will then ask whether it can constitute a literary genre. We will outline several approaches to ritual and consider whether the distinction between ritual and rite is relevant. We will examine how the rite may be characterized, whether it is archaic or contemporary, and the links between rite and language. We will then consider how the Masonic Rite may be characterized, what constitutes its mental universe and its matrix, and therefore its limits, and finally which elements make it possible to establish the Masonic “style” of the rite. [2] On this point, Stéphane Olivesi (Université Lyon 2) is not mistaken in his review of Pascal Lardellier's book Theory of the ritual bond. Anthropology and communication, that this author, "indicating that the ritual (used as a substantive and not as an adjective) is all the texts, coming in principle from tradition, which prescribes the rules of organization of the rite (for example, the rituals of Masses fix their ceremonial arrangement)" proposes a definition of "restrictive character", and we will add, an error in the perception of the notion of text. S. Olivesi raises an important question: "in societies without writing or in the most daily secular life, are there not rituals (a set of rules followed, without being formalised) that govern social practices?" (Media and identities). S o u r c e p a g e 1 0 1.2 Definitions 1.2.1 The "Ritual" For the Académie française, “ritual” is first associated with the Catholic religion, through the definition given in its dictionary: “Catholic liturgical book containing the rites of the sacraments and sacramentals and various formulas (exorcisms, blessings)”[3], before being defined, by analogy only, as a “collection of texts, on papyrus or engraved on temple walls, indicating the ordering of ceremonies in ancient Egypt”[4]. The definition is then extended to the rules and rites of a religion - of any religion - or even of an association. Alongside this primary religious aspect, a secular aspect is introduced, but the primacy given to Catholic liturgy reveals a cultural inheritance. The first edition of the Dictionary (1694) already contained: “Book containing the rite, or rite of a Church, of a Diocese. The ritual of Rome. The ritual of Paris,” with the example, “A new ritual has been printed”[5]. Giving etymology the floor will, in turn, remind us of some obvious points; in the end, etymologists always have the last word. This will probably not resolve the whole question, but it will provide a starting point. Aristotle thus observes, with regard to happiness, that “we must begin from the known facts”[6], and recalling the etymology is, in a sense, to state known facts that allow a first field of reflection to be delimited, even though Max Müller writes that “etymology deals with a past that never had a present.” The question is what semantic content should be attributed to the terms used. As a noun phrase, rituel derives from livre rituel (liure ritual), used by Rabelais[7] in 1564. Rabelais’s expression is a direct translation of the Latin rituales libri, “a book dealing with (relating to) rites,” attested in Gaffiot’s dictionary[8]. There is also the adjective ritual (an adjectival phrase), first used to designate an action, object, or term relating to the expression of the rite, but capable in ordinary everyday usage of meaning traditional, that is, customary or usual. Here the sense is close to habit and simple repetition, without any particular purpose. For Catholics, when the ritual denotes the book containing the texts that set out the content and sequence of the sacraments and other liturgical celebrations, the more usual expression is “liturgical books.” [3] Treasure of the computerised French language (http://atilf.atilf.fr/), Dictionnaire de l'Académie française, 9th edition, Computerized version. [4] Ibid. [5] Dictionary, 1694: 412. [6] Aristotle, 2004: I, 2.1. [7] Rabelais, 1997: 314 ("saying not sçay quel conjurations en langue Ethrusque, et parfois lisant en un livre ritual, qui pres se porto une de ses mystagogues"). [8] Gaffiot, 2001. S o u r c e p a g e 11 1.2.2 The "Rite" The ritual logically leads us to clarify the notion of rite, which is its raison d’être as a book of rites. We must probably once again begin with the origin of the words. “Rite” comes from the Latin ritus, first with the same meaning, “rite” or “sacred usage,” but also “usage, method, custom” and, finally, “way of life” or “customs.” The Latin adverb rite (formed from ritus) means “according to the rites” or “according to the rules,” “properly,” but also “as usual,” “rightly,” and “favourably,” and, more specifically, “in the manner prescribed by law,” “legally,” “formally,” or “solemnly.” The notion of rite has many synonyms or related terms: ceremony, magic, custom, religion, practice, worship, liturgy, observance, protocol, etiquette, tradition and, of course, habit. In the case of habit, as with custom, it is the repetitive aspect of the rite that is retained; this also appears to be true of practice. This routine aspect of the rite does not, however, constitute its principal foundation; it is only its outward face, a first shell at which one may stop when one does not seek to go further in understanding it. This characteristic is experienced only as a reduction of the rite to ceremonial - its external aspect - and to a ritualistic conception of liturgy, in which it “rhymes with monotony and litany”[9]. Ceremony, etiquette, observance and protocol nevertheless refer to formal requirements of precision that are added to the public, external aspect of an ordering, whereas religion specifies the content of rites. Magic has only recently been associated with ritual: the 1694 Dictionary defined magic simply as the “Art that produces marvellous effects by occult causes.” Rather than a synonym, this represents a division of the notion of rite into the religious (civilized) and the primitive (savage). Custom and tradition, and probably still practice, evoke the lasting aspect, because the rite is recurrent. One of the above diagrams proposes a rapprochement between practice (practice) and form (pattern), but we will say rather that it is a configuration. This last point is interesting because it reveals the aspect of structure, therefore of fixedness, of the rite. [9] Gelineau, 1989: 19. S o u r c e p a g e 1 2 QuickTime™ and a | QuickTime™ and TIFF decompressor (uncompressed) | TIFF decompressor (uncompressed) is required to view this image. | are required to view this image. Figure 1. Semantic nebula around ritual/ritual and custom. The rule to follow, the rite, determines an order of things, an intention to organize, or to arrange, the objects of the world. Any order of any set, experienced as, a priori, scattered, reveals a search for meaning. Available objects are re-disposed, to understand the relationships first, if they exist then and, in this case, to grasp what are, and finally to find the right place for everyone, including the operator. The Sanskrit and Vedic origin of the Latin term, ta, partially present in French, indicates "what is in conformity with the order", which reminds, for example, René Guénon[10] (and many others...) and refers to several types of order: a cosmic order, an order of the relations between gods and men and relations between men, which are expressed by a ritually prescribed truth and religiously issued in the order of sacrifice. We could add an order of relations between beings, between beings and things, between things themselves[11]. From the same root come the words art, arithmetic, rhythm. This notion was referred to in the Middle Ages by the word ordo whose use of derivatives is massively present in our culture. 1.2.3 Form, medium, contents These few definitions contain different facets which express the main points of these definitions. From a formal point of view, the "ritual" is essentially a textual set, a text. The different definitions reveal that this "text" is independent of its medium, whether it is vegetal (papyrus, paper), mineral (walls) and, we might add, animal (parchment). This text may in particular be stored in the individual, but most often collective, memory, in the case of oral texts. The two aspects are not excluded. As a text, ritual, is a collection and it can even be considered as a collection of particular texts. Indeed, it brings together all of the matters concerning religious ceremonies. In addition, the form "text" itself has a configuration, constituting in part its official, regulatory aspect, and which has been revealed in the concept of rite. This means that this text will not be structured in any way. [10] Guénon, 1953: chap. XIX. [11] We feel the great duality that will express itself in different ways, secular/sacred, pure/impur, etc. (Douglas, 2001). S o u r c e p a g e 1 3 Ritual has a content whose ultimate intention or aim is religious or, no doubt more precisely, sacred. The distinction between the two notions can be established from the institutionalization of practices. These practices determine the official or regulatory aspect of the text, directly linked to its public character: the content concerns rites, that is, the regulated ordering of ceremonies, or liturgy. The immediate aim of ritual is the reiteration of the objects of its content in a stable form. The reminder of the etymology does not contradict this aspect, since rituales libri refers only to religious rites. These two points condition the durability of the rite, which may be regarded as its traditional character: stability of form > reiteration > stability over time. We therefore face several questions from a single notion. The ritual will be considered as a collection of uses whose general purpose is to allow (or facilitate) ceremonial (regular) practices, moreover linked to the life of a cult, speaking through rites. The existence of the ritual is thus based on the need to maintain the stability of the form to project it into temporal stability, and to bring together all the rules of the rite. The form of the text will retain the repetitive aspects attached to the various elements, but also to the "rural" object as a whole. The ritual seems to be made to be repeated (repeated), the ritual will indicate. Thus we find words belonging to the religious field, and words referring to repetitive (or routine) activity[12] and suggesting, more or less, the past. In our culture, this aspect is at least pejoicing. It would belong to the past! It is clear, however, that a ritual allows, in the present, to update practices which are, of course, from the past, at least one history, but still considered to be present. Their ultimate aim is preserved, their value remains contemporary for those who use the ritual object and assume its content. No doubt ceremonial and cultual practices are more essential to address it than the usual notion (re-iteration), which seems to be only a facet of it. [12] But voluntary! S o u r c e p a g e 1 4 The articulation seems to be between the memory aspect – the past of the text – and its updating – its present, to which we must add the ultimate aim, the considerations attached to the sacred. It is no doubt possible for us to consider the question as "concerning the relationship between the past of remembered things, the present of things seen and the future of things expected"[13]. The ritual, understood globally, has a last character that we believe is useful to emphasize: it is anonymous, except in very exceptional cases. Unlike many other types of texts, which have either an identified author or an author whom one can discover or which one can assume, the ritual is not the property of his or her authors. Any text stabilized by writing (some kind of writing), printing or other modern or old means of reproduction (lithic engraving), is in some way objectified or reified. It is then more of its readers (users, in any way whatsoever), or rather of their universe, than of its author. The ritual does so with the double title of reified text and anonymized text. It is only the property (property) of its users. It is only in appearance, because it remains the authenticated and authorized word of its author, whether unique or multiple, even if it disappears and disappears behind its text. Thus, "it would almost seem that no human subject is involved in orchestrating the liturgy"[14]. By this form of dispossession, "the author" (an authority or body recognized as such), by "offering" the text to practitioners, actually takes possession of the space of a word that he fills and imposes[15]. With regard to the textual structure of the Masonic ritual, it shows many resemblances of form with Christian catechisms or joca rum[16]. It always presents itself, globally, as a series of questions and answers (QR), a canonically "dialogical" form. The principle of presentation is not an innovation, but rather an anthropological basis. Platonic teaching, as here the formal aspect of the rite, presupposes a permanent relationship between the one who states and the others[17]. The catechistic form will take shape here between three main actors, the Venerable Master[18] (VM: the President), the 1st and 2nd Supervisors (1S, 2S: the assessors). The first manifests in the ritual a massive language presence: he can speak alone, address each of the Monitors or another actor of the Rite (Officer, Mason or Candidate[19]). The other actors will thus have less presence from this point of view. The speech will manifest itself in monologous form (VM alone to a silent actor), dilogued (VM-Surv) or trilogued (VM-1S2S)[20]. There are also indications between dialogues of practical procedures on the scheduling of the ceremony (attitudes, gestures, movements, positioning of objects), didascalies. [13] Ricœur, 2000: 731. [14] Buc, 2003: 146. [15] It is for this reason that the authority from which the ritual emanates considers itself to be the only authority authorized to modify it, jealously refusing the modifications made outside of it as innovations without value or even destructive. Variatur also exists in the Masonic domain. Any "commissioning of the ritual" that exists outside that of the managing authority will be defeated as soon as possible. [16] But also with the type of Platonic teaching made of answers to questions, in a progression of unveiling of the thought. [17] The method has its rhetorical foundations, the direct address to one "other", which can take several postures (hearing, reader, direct interlocutor) brings weight to the statement by involving the other. S o u r c e p a g e 1 5 The Masonic ritual has the same character of authority and anonymity that we come to evoke. It is indeed very rare for a version to be the work of a single person but, even when accompanied by an author's name (we will see it in the second part), its use as a reference text of the practices anonymized somewhat. But, in the same way, it is the place (and the stake) of a form of authority, drawing its legitimacy from the body from which it emanates. It is his word that he contains, it is his world that he proposes. Under cover of anonymity, it provides the mental framework in which the rite must develop. However, this does not mean that any initiative is impossible, especially in the field of interpretation... 1.3 Is "Rite" a literary genre? Our tendency to rank naturally leads us to place each type of text within a classification. This often seems to be the stage accompanying etymological definition and research. If it is defined as a text, the "ritual" does not seem to belong to any type of literary genre. We will ask, in a very naive way, the question of the definition of a literary genre, even if it can be found useless. A genre seems to be able to be defined by "a set of constraints of forms, themes and types of discourse leading to a certain type of decoding"[21] on this particular production which appears to be conventional because of its constraints. The decoding (reformulation) ensures, or must ensure, an intelligible reading of a particular type of text, depending on its characters. The discourse is shaped by these constraints, which allow a particular community of producers and users to recognize it as such. The structure may have some variations which do not affect the stability of the system. [18] Here we must emphasize our use of capitals. Some terms will be assigned from an initial capital to designate a concept belonging to the masonry used. Thus the Masonry will be a shortcut for Freemasonry, which will be distinguished from the masonry which will designate the profession or the trade. Similarly, Initiation will be Masonic but initiation means any type of initiation. We can specify a few other uses when necessary. [19] It goes without saying that the terms used are general and do not imply limiting the practice of this Rite to representatives of the male class. But for convenience we will not always specify, as a politically correct language likes to do at the moment. [20] A manifestation among others of the "triple voice", or of a sound ternary. [21] Website www.cafe.edu/genres/g-intro.html. S o u r c e p a g e 1 6 However, the list of literary genres is (sometimes) very long,[22] as we learn from the excellent Quebec site "self- taught courses of written French". Yet, "Ritual", as a text, is not part of it. Can we drag it as a genre in its own right into such a list and, moreover, why is it not recognized as such? Frédéric Gimello-Mesplomb states that "before being literary, genres were quite natural practices"[23]. We agree with that. "It is when the epics, the hymns, the tales and especially the tragedy (with its public competitions) are set up that the concept of gender will establish as a cultural fact"[24]. But our culture, however, is concerned to classify everything, never cites ritual as a genre. If we accept the twelve usual major categories of literature (autobiographical, comic, didactic, dramatic, epic, epistolar, lyrical, wonderful and fantastic, oratory, polemic, romantic, tragic), we discover that an element of rituals, prayer, is classified in the sub-group of exhortation, belonging to the oratory art itself. But we do not find "rites" as a genus, or as a species. When the twelve categories are grouped into three more general categories (narrative, poetry, theatre), there is also no room for ritual. To establish a typology of texts, Denise Malrieu and François Rastier[25] define four hierarchical levels superior to the text: speeches (e.g. legal, literary, essayist, scientific), generic fields (e.g. theatre, poetry, narrative genres), genres (e.g. comedy, "serious" novel, police novel, news, tales, memoirs and travel accounts), subgenres (e.g. novel by letters). The ritual clearly does not fit into any of their categories. Does their own culture prompt them to think for a moment about this type of text? This is clearly not part of their cultural horizon. The question may be there, in a contingent cultural constraint. In Les genres littéraires[26], Dominique Combe distinguishes four major classes of texts: narrative fiction, poetry, theatre and essay where he places philosophical or theoretical discourse, among others. But he never cites the word ritual and, more broadly, he does not mention any text of a religious type. The Quebec site "cafe"[27] has a "Rituels" entry. Religious texts" but what is retained does not seem to us to describe a particular literary genre, it would rather be a heteroclite collection of objects belonging to a very general religious field. On the other hand, we find a large number of sub-entrys that we will give for pleasure, amen, angelus, antienne, ave, benedicity, canticum, coronach, diurnal, doxology, sprucedion, graces, hosanna, liturgical leitmotiv, macarism (or blessing), magnificat, mantra, noël, oratorio, oremus, patenôtre, psalm, and sequence, relating to ritual, in particular, Christian, or parts of ritual. [22] The "coffee" website (self-taught course of written French) lists 141 different genera (this list will be consulted at the URL: www.cafe.edu/genres/g-intro.html#5). There we discover ritual dances (but a ritual does not consist only of agitating in rhythm), myths, puzzles, legends, prayers, canonical ceremonies. Are these "rites" thus named? [23] Gimello-Mesplomb, 1998 reproduces in his course the list of coffee.edu (personal communication). [24] Website www.cafe.edu/genres/g-intro.html. [25] Malrieu-Rastier, 2001. [26] Combe, 1992. S o u r c e p a g e 1 7 All this is interesting, and specifies many terms, formulas, or isolated sequences, but does not describe the notion of ritual that seems to us more comprehensive. A ritual (here in the religious domain) is not simply a prayer, but is often elaborated around one or more of them. It is not, either, a religious song or poem, but it often includes such sequences. Ritualism is often a religious-type "talk" that can bring together several types of texts. Even though he classified the texts, Aristotle (the father of all taxonomy[28]) does not speak of rituals. No modern author gloating on Aristotle does, either, any hint. This did not seem to interest Kant, for example, Humboldt or Hegel. If they had dealt with this issue, it would soon appear on reading. The great literary or philosophical questions do not have time, nor taste, to approach a ritual that seems to be pushed back in some corners of culture. It's like the ritual doesn't exist here. But he resists. There is, however. Moreover, it seems surprising to us that ritual is not considered as a genre in its own right because, as far back as we go in literature, to say in the existence of texts, whatever the cultures and the media, we find rituals, and perhaps even rituals before notary reports, contracts, accounts and calculations. But it seems that the various forms adopted by the various rituals did not allow them to be accommodated in a single genre. It is discovered, however, that the ritual, or the general notion of ritual, has given rise to a great deal of study. Apart from what we will call the "professionals" of ritual, anthropologists, sociologists, liturgists or religious (and some Masons, as far as our texts are concerned), structuralists or Semiotians, who may or may not be religious or liturgist, have taken possession of the object with delight, because they have found there a wide field of application to their disciplines. The decoding of the "ritual" object, considered to be "meaning ensemble", has thus given rise to some studies of its structures, or has been mentioned for some of its aspects.[29] But the division of disciplines has its limits and various studies of anthropologists, sociologists, of ethnologists or historians, to name but a few, reveal the ancillary use of semiotic methods. According to Philippe Buc, "Historical discipline has seen the "rites" invade the titles of books, articles and conference sessions"[30], to the point that it is important to justify this attitude of his fellow historians. [27] University of Montreal website. URL: www.cafe.edu. [28] Topics and Categories.